header-logo header-logo

15 November 2018 / Dominic Regan
Issue: 7817 / Categories: Opinion , Procedure & practice , Costs
printer mail-detail

Procedural nightmares

​Dominic Regan provides some answers to the civil procedure worries keeping you up at night

Every October, I visit six cities and deliver a lengthy annual review of civil procedure. This year, the same three concerns were raised at every venue. What follows are my answers to those questions.

How do I ensure that Pt 36 doesn’t trip me up?

It is astonishing to think that so far this year we have had over a dozen reported decisions on the measure, five from the Court of Appeal, and another High Court judgment is imminent.

First things first: one must abide by the requirements of the provision. The safest way to make a compliant offer is by using the court form of offer, the N242A. Use of the form is not mandatory, but the benefit is that it helpfully prompts the offeror as to what is required, such as a relevant period of at least 21 days. Do not seek to adjust the measures enshrined in the Rule.

The deadly trap within Pt 36 is that an

If you are not a subscriber, subscribe now to read this content
If you are already a subscriber sign in
...or Register for two weeks' free access to subscriber content

MOVERS & SHAKERS

Sidley—James Inness

Sidley—James Inness

Partner joins capital markets team in London office

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Haynes Boone—William Cecil

Firm announces appointment of partner as UK general counsel

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Devonshires—Nicholas Barrows

Firm appoints first chief marketing officer to drive growth strategy

NEWS
A seemingly dry procedural update may prove potent. In his latest 'Civil way' column for NLJ this week, Stephen Gold explains that new CPR 31.12A—part of the 193rd update—fills a ‘lacuna’ exposed in McLaren Indy v Alpa Racing
The long-running Mazur saga edged towards its finale as the Court of Appeal heard arguments on whether non-solicitors can ‘conduct litigation’. Writing in NLJ this week, Professor Dominic Regan of City Law School reports from a packed courtroom where 16 wigs watched Nick Bacon KC argue that Mr Justice Sheldon had failed to distinguish between ‘tasks and responsibilities’

The Court of Appeal has slammed the brakes on claimants trying to swap defendants after limitation has expired. In Adcamp LLP v Office Properties and BDB Pitmans v Lee [2026] EWCA Civ 50, it overturned High Court rulings that had allowed substitutions under s 35(6)(b) of the Limitation Act 1980, reports Sarah Crowther of DAC Beachcroft in this week's NLJ

Cheating in driving tests is surging—and courts are responding firmly. Writing in NLJ this week, Neil Parpworth of De Montfort Law School charts a rise in impersonation and tech-assisted fraud, with 2,844 attempts recorded in a year
As AI-generated ‘deepfake’ images proliferate, the law may already have the tools to respond. In NLJ this week, Jon Belcher of Excello Law argues that such images amount to personal data processing under UK GDPR
back-to-top-scroll